Star Trek’s Memorial Day Weekend Impresses Box Office Watchers May 25, 2009
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Paramount, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
The estimates are in for Memorial Day and Star Trek is projected to take in a total of $29.4M for the four day holiday weekend domestically, putting it in third place. Star Trek’s $6.6M Memorial day estimate puts its total domestic take to $191M. Trek’s continued performance has impressed many box office watchers, details below.
Trek’s impressive 4 day weekend
As Star Trek heads towards taking over the top spot as highest grossing film of 2009 (domestically), box office watchers are impressed, here are some quotes from today:
Posting another strong performance was the sci-fi smash Star Trek which took in an estimated $29.4M over the Friday-to-Monday span lifting the cume to a robust $191M after 18 days of release. The three-day portion stood at $22.8M for a 47% drop which was encouraging given the arrival of competing sci-fi franchise flick Terminator. Trek now looks set to finish its domestic run in the neighborhood of $250M making it the seventh biggest blockbuster in company history for Paramount
- Box Office Guru
Down 47 percent for the three-day weekend, Star Trek notched an estimated $29.4 million four-day, and, with $191 million in 18 days, it jumped ahead of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock to become the Star Trek franchise’s fourth most-attended picture. Its descent was partly due to a loss of IMAX showings: the Night at the Museum sequel took over nearly all of them. Playing only midnight shows at 130 sites, Star Trek’s IMAX-only weekend was an estimated $600,000, off over 90 percent from last weekend for an IMAX-only tally of $20.7 million.
- Box Office Mojo
Trek,’ in particular, is holding up extremely well — the sci-fi reboot is closing in on $200 million and should take over Monsters vs. Aliens this week to become 2009’s top moneymaker.
- EW
In third is the most elusive of all box-office creatures, the summer blockbuster with "legs": Paramount’s Star Trek. At $191 million in earnings with just a miniscule drop of 47 percent, the film is on the cusp of becoming the highest grossing film of the year.
- Hollywood.com
Paramount’s "Star Trek" held up well with $29.4 million, warping down to the No. 3 spot but raising its total to $191 million. The sci-fi franchise reboot directed by J.J. Abrams is on the verge of becoming the year’s top-grossing movie so far, approaching the $193.5 million gross of DreamWorks Animation’s "Monsters vs. Aliens."
"’Star Trek’ is living long and prospering," said [Paul] Dergarabedian [of Hollywood.com]. "It’s just one of those movies we knew would hold up. People are enjoying it and talking about it. It’s unusual for a summer blockbuster to be propelled by word of mouth, not just the typical marketing push for a big opening weekend. I think it’s going to continue to do well week after week."
- AP
The J.J. Abrams reboot is being fueled by great word of mouth and has already reached $191 million, almost unthinkable for a "Star Trek" movie. "Trek" should surpass "Monsters vs. Aliens" as the top grossing movie of the year sometime this week.
- HitFix
There is no new Monday data from overseas, but we have already noted that Star Trek has not matched its domestic performance internationally. As HitFix notes, Angels & Demons has already overtaken Star Trek in international sales, even though it opened a week later.
Today’s domestic estimates of $191M combined with yesterday’s THR estimate of $87.5 overseas (as of Sunday), gives Trek a current estimated total global take of $278.5M.
Loading ...
Comments»
Great!!!
Pretty damn tasty. $300m soon. Star Trek is hot stuff. :D
Darn.. Oh, well. Next time! Fantastic to see it doing so well. Glad to see some of our own “word of mouth” working!
“almost unthinkable for a “Star Trek” movie. ”
I don’t know If I should be offended or not
I’m delighted to hear it’s doing so well, but I don’t understand all the hoopla if it’s still only in fourth place among all the Trek movies in terms of attendance. Can someone enlighten me?
I wonder why international sales are so low. Im also confused as to how it does SO MUCH better domestically, does domestic count Canada too?
#6 Inflation measured against ticket prices vs seats filled.
TMP was almost 30 years ago
Fantastic. I have seen it 8 times niw. Hey Bob Orci. I tripple dog dare you to make the next move so grate that it will make me see the next Movie more then i have seen this one. Are you up to the challenge. I know i am. Lol
You know what this means. It could be like Casino Royale. Did great as a refresh film. Then the second film came out and was somewhat of a disappointment!
I’m kidding.
I hope its not the case. I just hope the film continues to do well and we see more great Trek with stories that has questions about science, ideals or philosophy in a great adventure story next time.
Hey Anthony. How many times have you seen Trek.
Great numbers domestically! But it seems that Paramount needs to invest a bit more in international markets. If they do so, I think the sequel will work better overseas.
By the way, Vulcan’s sky DOES get blue! In the episode “Terra Nova” of Enterprise, T’Pol states that the Vulcan sky does occasionally get as blue as Earths. So, no canon violations. Nerdy stuff, I know.
@5: JML9999:
Don´t be offended. The new Star Trek movie was a great risk for Paramount. When you look at the total gross of the last 4 ST movies you will know why 300 Mio. $ was almost unthinkable for a ST movie.
But I am still a little shocked how badly ST is doing in the international markets. Okay, there is an increase in sales in comparison to Nemesis but overall the Nemesis Shadow is still a little too big. I am hoping that many many people here in Europe will give ST a chance when the DVD and Blu-Ray is out. I´ll bet that the next ST movie will also have legs in the international markets (if it is good). ;)
I’m somewhat disappointed for this movie’s performance outside the US. It’s a wonderful movie, it’s sad things happen this way.
hr is reporting 11.5m for trek this weekend for a 87m total
Good to see people are buying into the whole style over substance approach of JJ Abrams and O&K
Give me Behr, Moore, Taylor, Braga, Berman or Coto. any day.
Why do the IMAXs in the US just stop playing it after two weeks? I went to see it on 7th May at the BFI IMAX in the UK and I’m going to see it again on the 8th June where it’s still playing at least three times a day. I wanted to see it sooner but the 8th June was the first day I could actually get decent centre seats.
there were almost no marketing for the movie here in germany and i think same thing in rest of europe! that angeldemon movie is another reason: it is so much about european history, people had a better link to it!
#2: Oh HELL yeah. If it could reach that by my Graduation Day, I would geekasm.
i can haz extended showings?
#5. tholianhata:
“it’s still only in fourth place among all the Trek movies in terms of attendance”
Only?! ST 2009 made more in 25 days than all but 3 ST movies! And actually it should become 3rd by tomorrow, beating TWOK. Then 2nd before week 4 is done, beating TVH.
Good to see people are buying into the whole style over substance approach of JJ Abrams and O&K
Give me Behr, Moore, Taylor, Braga, Berman or Coto. any day.
Well. I think Trek had wonderfull Substance and i for one am so glad that Bernman and comp had nothing to do with Trek. This was the best Trek Movie. Not just in style but in substance and drama and humer and fx. Trek had the whole package.
16-Max I am sorry you didn’t enjoy the new film. As a LONG time Trekkie, I would offer the opinion that it NEEDED a bit more style; it is a two hour movie which can’t afford to build up to great storytelling like DS9 (two seasons before the really good stuff hit), ENT (season four hit its stride) TNG (Season three finally balanced Roddenberryism with action), or VOY (oh, wait. That show NEVER hit its stride). The first six Trek films could not operate in a vacuum, and are truly appreciated in the context TOS provides- and the four TNG films were NEVER better than the series (with the possible exception of First Contact). This movie had a responsibility to throw in some flash while digging for what made Trek great in the first place- characters. I would ask you consider that before dismissing this more stylized approach. “More of the same” would have killed Trek- I like the fact people who wouldn’t talk to me about TOS a month ago are asking to borrow episodes from me. If it takes lens flares to get 18 year olds watching Trek- so be it.
Wonder if the MST3k guys will do a riff on the new movie…
#17 Wiki Says Film Breaks in IMAX HD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAX
I would imagine similar issues with Standard IMAX just a little longer to happen
@9 Actually I’m hoping it is more like the Batman franchise…bad movie and poor box office (’Batman and Robin’) leads to a reboot of the series (’Batman Begins’) that does well critically and financially and leads to ‘The Dark Knight’.
@16 It’s fun…something a Star Trek movie (or Star Trek in general) hasn’t been in almost 20 years.
@18 Agreed on all counts…lived in Germany for 4 years and some movies never seem to be advertised well (or at all) and even have a limited showing in the the Kinos. When ‘Superman Returns’ came out I had to watch it at a Air Force movie theater (Ramstein AB) because it never came out anywhere in the area.
Oh and by the way regarding the IMAX showings, as everyone knows that changed the release date and in doing so the were only able to get a slot of two weeks for IMAX theaters. Talked to a theater manager about that in Augusta, Georgia.
@22 I agree with everything you said (wow you’re reading my mind) with the exception of ENT…the only reason it ’seemed’ to get better was because it started riffing on elements of the original series. Yeah I liked seening orion slaves girls, augments, Arik Soong, and so on…but the characters were still boring and in the end I didn’t care what happened to them.
And I thought Paramount were OUT OF THEIR VULCAN MINDS for pushing TREK back from Christmas to Summer. I thought, “No way would a STAR TREK film do gangbusters as a Summer Movie, bound to be trounced by everything else.”
Now I think the guys running the show at Paramount are geniuses.
28 Now I think the guys running the show at Paramount are geniuses.
I agree withy you. When thay announced that i was so upset. But now. Im happy happy happy!!!!!!.
I can’t wait for the next phase.. DVD & BluRay sales figures! What better film to own in high definition; I have my credit card handy; but alas this long run in the multiplexes will have me waiting a while ;-)
#5 tholianhata
The top domestic box office number for Trek is TMP @ $239M (adjusted) – that being after it’s full 3-5 month run at the box office. Since BoxOfficeGuru is predicting $250M gross domestic by the end of ST09’s run, it should easily be the the most popular film in the Trek franchise to date.
However, Guru is grossly overstating ST09 as the 7th highest grossing blockbuster in Paramount’s history. Guru’s “All Time” chart is unadjusted actual numbers only. Using boxofficemojo adjusted All Time list puts Trek’s $250M projection below the 16th and last Par film shown on the chart at $336M. So it is likely Trek is in the top 25, which is still pretty good, but 7th is just simply misleading (IN MY OPINON)
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
Lastly, Trek also has the biggest budget of all the movies. Assuming it earns $250M domestically, once you deduct the $150M actual cost to make the film (reported by the studio), Trek has cleared only $100M domestically, which puts it 5th behind TMP which had a similar adjusted budget and performance numbers, in terms of profit performance.
WHILE THIS IS MERELY MY OPINION –
The numbers reflect actual adjusted for inflation box office, which have been reduced by the actual cost to make the film. (NOT the marketing, distribution or any other cost which can be amortized over sequels and other projects within the franchise).
I don’t make this analysis to bring the film down, but to put it in perspective. Trek will likely be the MOST popular film in the franchise and will likely be one of Paramount’s most 25 popular films at the box office. All of these things are jewels in Trek’s crown, which was already hugely successful for Paramount in the past.
And #13, this was NEVER a “great risk for Paramount”. As these numbers show, Trek was making plenty of money for Paramount, especially with the budgets they were spending. It had an excellent profit ratio until Nemesis. It was then they stepped back, reevaluated and brought yet another successful franchise onboard in JJ Abrams, and with the profit potential of both allocate $150M budget with full confidence they would earn it back. A studio just doesn’t throw $150 away on a gamble. Abrams/Trek was always going to earn back their investment, which was also an investment toward the future, the only question was how successful they were going to be. The answer is clearly: VERY.
16. Max – May 25, 2009
The sour grapes are on the table.
The substance was there, I’m sorry you did not see it that way…. or did you see it all?
Seen this movie 9 times already. Bloody well going to see it one more time. Try and stop me!
LOL WAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 278.5M!!! They are going to double their money on this. The next two films are locked!
Word of mouth worked so well, so did the all the advertising. Yes this could have done better overseas, but its doing better then past trek movies overseas and in every other way. Honestly…278.5M…what the hell do you have to nit pick about? This is the most a star trek film has made in its time (without the inflation conversion.) I hope this movie wins an oscar.
Does anyone know how if Paramount has said anything, officially, regarding Trek’s box office performance. I hope they increase the budget and go for an even bigger scale. Go $200 million and create an enemy that is more 3 dimensional. I think even going with a story line in the next one that continues, a larger War, or something.
#16:
>Give me Behr, Moore, Taylor, Braga, Berman or Coto. any day.<
The folks that were around for VOY, ENT, ‘Insurrection’ & ‘Nemesis’? Those folks?
I need to go see it again before it vanishes from theatres. 83
Great to see ‘Trek doing well!
So is it “logical” to assume that the since the Same writing team is heading up Transformers, (and FX are a given) that it will have the same Success?? More so Probably because Trans, is further reaching with it’s demographic.
Here’s hoping it will go much Higher than this, way more and Faster too.
“33. Roman – May 25, 2009
Seen this movie 9 times already. Bloody well going to see it one more time. Try and stop me!”
lol It’s stuff like this that is really padding the numbers. Not as many new butts in seats as it seems.
I don’t get the whole going to see a movie 90 times. If i see it once, good enough, I’ve seen it. The only reason I saw this one twice is because my friend wanted me to come along for company and she even paid for it.
#39
Personally, if I enjoy *any* movie this much, I’m game for seeing it more than once in the theatre. For me, the theatre experience is never matched at home (HDTV & Bluray be damned), so I have to enjoy it while I still can.
I wouldn’t say that’s ‘padding the numbers’, however. A very small percentage of fans or really any moviegoer will see a film that often.
Down 47%? haha! Great number…
I’m going back enough to more than make up for those too-old-timers who aren’t going, and who can’t relax and enjoy the best Trek movie in many years, Too bad for them! I’ve been a fan since 71 and I’m loving this return to roots.
Just back from my second “Trek” to ST09, and the cinema was sold out 2 showings in a row Monday here in NYC.
TREKPOWER IN 09!
Dang, if Shat was in it, it would have broken $200m through memorial day…
Trek is an AMERICAN product. It’s had a heavy hand in shaping AMERICAN culture. It’s foundation is an AMERICAN TV show.
There’s no reason to have EVER expected Star Trek to be as substantial overseas.
People have known the films overseas as something they don’t get and can’t relate to. Nor should they.
Well, I saw it again today with my daughter. Theater was almost packed. Sorry to say she didn’t thoroughly enjoy it, but I did – again.
16-
If you love Berman and Braga so much, then you can have them. I believe you can find those two over at FOX (an oddly appropriate outcome). Maybe you can help them pitch a pilot for a sci-fi series about a starship full of beauty contestants. We can even bring Jeri Ryan back as 7 of 9.
Most people I talk to say they want to see it twice!!!
Cha-ching.
Max # 16
I can’t understand the negativity.
“Star Trek” is the biggest hit of 2009 and you are trying to find fault with it?
Do you understand that this franchise was considered dead by most observers only a few months back?
Star Trek’s return to the top of the pop culture heap has been nothing short of stunning.
People – if you did not enjoy this film – it’s either because you did NOT see this film or you’re a closet star wars fan!!
The opening sequence alone is better than the last few trek movies.
Finally, THANK GOD that these bozos: Behr, Moore, Taylor, Braga, Berman or Coto were no where close to ruin this film especially Moore – would have been the worst piece of *&^% ever.
PS tell everyone to go see this movie – best trek movie ever!!!!!
Congratulations to J.J. Abrams and the entire team for reviving “Star Trek.” It is performing so well that it has revived a truly dead brand. As a fan, I can think of no greater outcome for this series.
And also a tip of the cap to the studio for its fantastic marketing plan and for making “Trek” its tentpole for 2009. While I was disappointed in not seeing it last Winter, this is a far better scenario.
Happy days are here again. We don’t need the Shat to make Trek big again. Happy days are here again!!
#53 sans-shatner
May have not needed Shatner at this point, but Star Trek did need Kirk and Spock to appeal to the general audience again.
P.S. Don’t count Shatner + Nimoy out for the sequel. J.J. Abrams himself is already saying that Shatner’s return is very possible.
I can understand the negativity. It seems that a few people made up their minds that they would hate the film before it even came out, that’s why they keep making arguments that don’t hold any water, like the whole “style over substance” platform. I get a kick about how the folks that didn’t like the movie still hang-out on this board.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
50. VOODOO – May 25, 2009
Max # 16
I can’t understand the negativity.
“Star Trek” is the biggest hit of 2009 and you are trying to find fault with it?
Do you understand that this franchise was considered dead by most observers only a few months back?
Star Trek’s return to the top of the pop culture heap has been nothing short of stunning.
16. Max – It must be nice to be about the only guy who can see that we’ve all been duped. Since you are so vastly superior to the rest of us, I wonder why you even trouble yourself to come here. Shouldn’t you be on AICN instead? That seem more equal to your superior intellect.
I saw it for the second time today. The showing had a bigger turnout than the one I saw opening day.
I did my part and saw it again today. The audience applauded both during and after. Plus the b.o. victory over A & D. I’m lovin’ this!! Bring on the sequel with Shatner!
NO SHATNER, EVER AGAIN
I’m personally disappointed to discover that the movie’s run in Singapore is almost over. We have three major cinema players in our island nation, and arguably the biggest one has already replaced Trek with Monsters and Aliens (which just opened here). That’s definitely going to affect this weekend’s box-office performance.
I guess Singapore’s just not ready for Trek, in general.
Still, it’s heartening to know that some non-fans have been persuaded to watch it based on my reviews.
To put it all in perspective, I have taken the total gross for each Trek film and divided it by average ticket prices for the year of release to arrive at a very approximate total ticket sales for each Trek movie. And yes, I have ‘way too much time on my hands, but I suspected this was interesting and I was right.
The Countdown:
11. Nemesis [of course] 7,451,866
10. Final Frontier 13,151,145
09. Insurrection 14,965,385
08. Undiscovered Country 17,785,360
07. Generations 18,103,139
06. First Contact 20,820,789
05. Search for Spock 22,759,239
04. Star Trek 2009 24,500,000 and counting
03. Wrath of Khaaaaan 26,841,143
02. Voyage Home 31,164,622
01. STTMP 32,772,948
Interesting trends noted here
First of all, it finally shoots the even/good-odd/bad theory all to hell and back.
Second, it verifies that The Next Generation was definitely the second class citizens of Trekology. Compared to the Kirk/Spock/McCoy troika, Picard/Riker/Data is pretty bland. JJ & Co made the best choice to revive the Franchise.
Third, with a budget to finish the film properly, Final Frontier might not have fared all that badly, maybe up there with Undiscovered Country
Fourth, the latest Trek still has a ways to go to catch the top two films, but has a decent shot.
And finally- Star Trek is back big time baby!!!!!!!!!!!!
For those who want to keep track of the sales, divide total gross by 7.18 to get the total up-to-date.
#31:
I have to respectfully disagree with you. I do think this movie was a big risk. I know you took me for task the other day for saying the same thing, so I do know your opinion, but it doesn’t change the fact that trends starting as far back as the last season of DS9 showed TREK’s star (pardon the pun) seemed to be dimming.
After three movies in a row with declining profits and two series also with shrinking ratings, and with critics saying TREK was old hat, not cutting edge anymore, it clearly was a risk for Paramount to put up nearly 300 milion dollars.
AND based on some of the bitching (pardon my French) here for the past two years it was also clear TREK fans were dissatisfied. I do not think it was a certainty that the fans were going to support this one.
BUT I am glad that we did. If it had failed I think it mght have been awhile before we had seen another film or series.
Where I do agree with you is that Paramount “took a step back, re-evaluated… and invested” in the future. While it seems most of the naysayers have found they were wrong, some of the criticisms of the film are valid (and believe me, I LOVED the film).
What I’d like to see corrected:
A more realistic engineering section.
A bit more of a TREKian philosophy.
More McCoy, more Scotty (and not just as comic relief)
Everything else, in my book was just gravy! AND I think this is realistic as I know the writers couldn’t do everything in this origins’ story.
Keep on trekkin’ (as they used to say in the 70s)!
Lay off the nay-sayers! Some of you fans are foaming at the mouth, seriously. Calm down.
STXI was massively flawed in narrative structure and in visual design. Joe Public generally forgives that because it’s Star Trek, as if being Trek makes it okay the film is flawed in almost embarrassing ways. But every fan that asked a question knows what I mean, so no need to beat a dead horse.
And sure, it’s a big exciting movie, but the philosophy and thought that makes Star Trek what I love (believe it or not, I don’t watch Trek to see grown men fist-fighting) is gone. (Don’t bother arguing this with me, I’ve read it a million times and I still feel that STXI had nothing to say outside of Hollywood short-hand on the few issues it did address and did not give any time for audiences to engage those issues themselves).
But now, Abrams et al. don’t have to listen to any of us anymore. He’s making money and that’s all that matters. He knows how to market and how to get butts in seats! The trouble is, he’s still got work to do getting to know Star Trek as a social and philosophical tool. They mustn’t relax at that task, regardless of the $$ figures.
Saw it for the 3rd time today and still loved it!
I might have done this instead:
Kirk and Spock as rival academy instructors, with Spock not yet a full commander. Lieutenant Commander maybe. This way, Lieutenant Kirk could have been the “stack of books on legs” we heard about. As a lieutenant, he would have already served some time in the fleet (say, aboard the Republic and the Farragut).
It also would have been believable for Uhura, Chekov, et al. to have been their students. McCoy, entering Starfleet as a doctor could have a higher rank from the get-go. Probably lieutenant or lieutenant commander.
But that’s not the way they played it and the result was STILL a highly entertaining movie that was very much Star Trek in spirit. I have little doubt that I’ll see it again while it’s in theaters. It’s one of the best times I’ve had at the movies in a while.
While I’m thinking about “things I would’ve done”, here’s more:
I like the idea of a more industrial and mechanized looking engineering space, but this was clumsily executed.. It was conceptually interesting but not really logical. CG enhancements a la Battlestar Galactica could have helped a lot to make it look more like a futuristic starship engine room that would fit into the Enterprise’s engineering hull.
The bridge: way too busy. It would be difficult if not impossible to command a ship with the level of visual and audio cacophony portrayed here. I took the con of a US Navy ship many times during the 80s and things needed to be quiet and orderly so the crew on watch could focus on their jobs. This bridge was visually exciting but highly impractical. Unsafe even.
The phaser: HATED IT!
The Enterprise: I was one of the first to accept it, and I still do. BUT! I would have stuck more faithfully to the original design. Then again, they didn’t ask me… (and it’s around 300 meters long. Until otherwise stated onscreen, that’s my story and I’m sticking to it!)
But I still loved the movie. I can’t wait to see how these guys follow up a winner lke this!
Is there any chance Star Trek will be the highest grossing film (in the US) of 2009 or am I being utterly unrealistic ?
6.
No international sales = NO PUBLICITY!
I bet the sequel will get a lot more attention after this one…but who know’s. Only a few 30sec TV ads downunder. Not one Billboard that I saw anywhere.
Shame on you Paramount even after the world premier in Sydney you guys did nothing else in Australia except a few TV interviews.
66 Ben – I’m afraid there’s probably no way Star Trek will beat Harry Potter.
66: Ben, you are being unrealistic.
BUT it should finish in the top five.
Star Trek made more domestically over the last weekend than Nemesis in its entire run.
“The next two films are locked!”
so, new bad guy in “2″ and Khan in “3″? that’s what i’d like to see. we don’t want to rush to meet Khan before the crew and ship are tested in “2″, best to wait for “3″ before we really scare everyone with Javier Bardem’s Khan in 2013.
51. ”
Finally, THANK GOD that these bozos: Behr, Moore, Taylor, Braga, Berman or Coto were no where close to ruin this film especially Moore – would have been the worst piece of *&^% ever.”
I have mixed feelings about throwing those folks under the bus. Braga and Taylor wrote some of my favorite Star Trek ever, e.g. Chain of Command and The Drumhead; Berman did a fantastic job casting TNG; and Behr and Moore’s DS9 dealt with some things that no other Trek did.
on the other hand, Kertzman, Orci, JJ, Berk, and Lundlolf have the keys now and i’m very happy about that.
66. Harry Potter will destroy everything.
#63 -’ I don’t watch Trek to see grown men fist-fighting’
That happened in virtually every TOS episode – so I guess you weren’t a fan of Kirk and Spock and co anyway? Don’t get me wrong, I love Trek in all its forms and grew up with TOS on a black and white TV in the 70s so I’m not knocking it!
I loved this film, it’s ethos about friendships, destiny and fate was pure Roddenberry – do agree that the next film should have at least a nod to the exploration of space and trtaditional Trek ethos rather than Starfleet being some sort of military ‘armada’ as they say in the film.
#74
Harry Potter AND Transformers will both gross more than Trek this year, without a doubt.
63.
“I don’t watch Trek to see grown men fist-fighting’”
74.
” That happened in virtually every TOS episode”
Maybe we could get a Judo chop or a two-foot-kick or a throw-your-entire-body-into-the-enemies move in star trek “2″ to make it more TOS style.
lolz
Oh how i love to laugh at he folks who be-moan on the fist fights and womanising Kirk… that happened in nearly every episode of TOS!
I have seen the film 3 times now here in the UK, and despite the awful lack of advertising, every time the cinema has been packed full.
I even got a mail from a freind of mine over the weekend (she has NEVER enjoyed sc-fi), which read
“Yesterday i watched the new Star Trek film. As you are a si-fi fan i would strongly advise a viewing! It was actually good!!! I am not really a si-fi fan”
I am gald JJ, Bob and the crew have done what they have… bring on the sequal…and please, get the Shat in there!
PS.. On Wed’s I am off to see it for the 4th time!
#16 – Max, you knobhead. Brannon & Braga had their time, did some great stuff then served up crap at the end. The reboot is here. Wake up and live it. Ya knobhead.
great to see as it clearly states “the legend lives on”
A drop of 47%! What a Star Trek kind of number!
Keep on Boldly Going, Trek!
My take on the last years of Trek before this movie came out is that the creative team of Berman, Brannon, Braga, et. al. just got burned out. I don’t hold anything personal against them because creatively they just seemed toward the end to just start to repeat themselves. The creative team had a hell of a run (1987-1995) and we got alot of good stories told but when the franchise seems dead it has always thrived on new energy which this new movie has given it. People can dislike it for whatever reason they may have…but personally I think it is a fun movie and look forward to further sequels and other adventures in the future.
63.
“I don’t watch Trek to see grown men fist-fighting’”
Then you should stop watching.
JJ&Co. have brought Trek back to its roots as an offshoot of 1960s Westerns. Also Kirk has always been a physical guy who’s as good at staying out of trouble as he is at handling himself when in trouble. It’s integral to the character that he fights hand-to-hand.
The Bermanverse took all the battles into space, and Picard wasn’t even allowed to go on away teams. All close-quarters battles were with particle weapons. And there were many.
Also, if one decries the lack of a ‘big message’ in ST09, one has to realize that, in 1966, the ‘message’ was always staring at you from the Bridge: a multi-racial/national crew of men and women running a Federation Starship was provocative. 43 years later, we’re used to it.
#5—”I’m delighted to hear it’s doing so well, but I don’t understand all the hoopla if it’s still only in fourth place among all the Trek movies in terms of attendance. Can someone enlighten me?”
It’s only been out for 18 days.
now all us trekkies need is a new series :D
@ 59. freddy
Freddy…go away. William Shatner IS Captain Kirk. Now, yeah, Chris Pine does an excellent job. But Shatner IS and ALWAYS WILL BE Captain J. T. Kirk! If you can’t see that, why are you here?
Ben #66
There is about a 5% chance that Star Trek will be #1 for 2009 in the U.S.
I don’t think the film will go much higher than $250 million and it is very likely that “Transformers II”, “Harry Potter” and James Cameron’s “Avatar” all pass $300 million.
That said a top 5 finish is very possible. Either way you look at it the movie is a huge success.
# 84 – you’re wrong – Chris Pine is now and forever be Kirk – Shatner is TOOO old and big to even fit on an IMAX screen…..
Everyone: See it again!!!
Ok, love the movie, warts and all, but I have a question that MAYBE has been addressed already, but I don’t think so:
Why is CAPT.Robau wearing blue??? Any “canonistic” reason? Or is it because they thought Faran Tahir (sp?) looked better in blue than gold? ;)
Notice: There is a cgi rendering (or augmented photo) of the bridge in the latest ST mag WITHOUT all the barcode scanners, etc.
It looks FAR better, imo
“76. Geoffers – May 26, 2009
Oh how i love to laugh at he folks who be-moan on the fist fights and womanising Kirk… that happened in nearly every episode of TOS!”
I have an article here somewhere, where someone wrote about the very topic of Kirk being thought of as a womanizer. This is a common misconception, it’s just something that has trickled into the mainstream understanding of Kirk from casual viewing. The majority of the time Kirk was with an alien woman, it was to get out of a situation…to protect his ship and crew. He used his ability to charm. He had very real, very mature relationships with Edith Keeler and Miramee. Kirk was far from a womanizer. I hope Orci and the new team go back take note of this.
I’m in Spain and my whole movie theater (Plaza Mayor, in Málaga) is full of Star Trek.
The problem isnt that it is badly publicized, it is just that the people here think Star Trek is very nerdy still
#88
I remember the conversation, and while I’ve always thought labeling Kirk a ‘womanizer’ was unfair, the fact that the loved the ladies was never in doubt (and lest we forget, TOS drove the point home by depicting every woman Kirk ever glanced at with the magical soft filter).
And I think it’s a bit of stretch to say he was ‘with’ any of those women to ‘protect his ship and crew’. Though I guess it gives new meaning to the idea of ‘taking one for the team’. LOL.
Saw it 4 times, at least 2 more in the theaters to go.
When I saw it this last time over Memorial weekend, I was on vacation with family in Iowa – you should have seen the excitement of the crowd (Take note: I was in “rural” Iowa), when IOWA flashed up on the screen twice! – I think they would have started helping Kirk in the bar fight if the scene would have been any longer!
- Just noticed this time, that “NCC-1701″ is clearly shown (twice) on the ship being built in the Riverside (Iowa) shipyard as the cadet’s shuttle is taking off.
- Still haven’t found R2D2 in the movie (he’s an easter egg in there somewhere, I’m guessing the bar scene background???)
I love the debate, gentlemen, thanks truly for being thinkers and recognizing at once the depth of Trek and the levity of Trek – both elements have made Trek what I love.
I look forward to wrestling with philosophical issues (Depth), character development (and especially story-archs), and the Levity of Trek (hand-to-hand combat, one-line zingers, quirks) in the next movie(s) and possible follow up series!
> 6. Jon – May 25, 2009
>I wonder why international sales are so low. Im also confused as to how it >does SO MUCH better domestically, does domestic count Canada too?
I can tell what´s happening here in Brazil.
For 40 years, “Star Trek’ was aired here dubbed in portuguese without interruption, altogether with “Bewitched” and “Batman and Robin”.
“Star Trek”, in portuguese would be called “Jornada nas Estrelas”, and this is how it was known for all brazilian trekkies, I have attended the local brazilian conventions, i´ve met Nimoy and Koenig, it was always a full house.
But since George Lucas demanded “STAR WARS” not to be translated to the local languages of foreign countries, to avoid merchandise bootlegging i think, local brazilian PARAMOUNT started to copy this idea, so instead of launching a movie with the title in portuguese “JORNADA NAS ESTRELAS” so every brazilian would know, they released the movie with the original ENGLISH title. “Star Trek”, so to sound “cool” and “new” and not to be associated with the “corny TV show from the black and white television” and so the lazy local Paramount marketers wouldn´t have to adapt Toy boxes and movie posters.
It is a moderated hit in here, but it could be so much more.
>I wonder why international sales are so low. Im also confused as to how it >does SO MUCH better domestically, does domestic count Canada too?
I guess so, isn´t Canada part of the United States? :)
61. Bob Tompkins – I’d love to see a theatre that only charges less than $7.18 per ticket. I’ve not paid less than $9.50 for a weekday matinee movie ticket in couple of years (including child & senior discounts). For Trek I paid $13.00 & $14.50 at two different theaters, so I really have to question where that number comes from. Does it really cost that much less in the mid-west to see a movie? In order for $7.18 to be an average when there are theaters charging over $14, many would have to charging less than $6. Since I know that’s not happening, I seriously question the validity of the number of tickets actually purchased as calculated by this method.
Either way, the ranking holds constant whether you reflect actual tickets sold, or the actual adjusted value of all tickets sold. So I’ll stick with the adjusted grosses as those introduce fewer unknowns.
ALSO, in TOTAL GROSSES ST09 is already the second most popular Trek film worldwide. Not sure why we think USA is the only place that counts, especially when it lowers the current popularity to 4th.
More importantly to me is the ranking after the budget is recouped:
TMP 407-136=$271M
TVH 258-52=$206M
TWOK 214-24=$190M
TSFS 178-34=$144M
FC 198-61=$137M
TUC 152-27=$125M
GEN 172-50=$122M
ST09 268-150=$118M (Current)
INS 155-76=$79M
TFF 108-46=$62M
NEM 80-71=$9M
My prediction is that it will end the MOST popular and financially successful Trek film worldwide meaning over the next two months it should bring in at least another $150M. And if it follows the Batman Begins pattern, it will be the start of an even more successful franchise rebirth, as TMP was in 1979.
#63
Cagmar is back!
I am not surprised you didn’t like the movie. You were a negative nancy from day 1.
“it’s a big exciting movie, but the philosophy and thought that makes Star Trek what I love is gone. ” — Cagmar
Yeah, it’s gone. We can now only long for a repeat of the thoughtful “Shore Leave”. The philosophy of “A Piece of the Action” has influenced my entire life. I almost *never* leave my gangster books laying around.
Cagmar, I am being silly of course, but I think maybe, so are you.
#94
I pay $6.50 here in AZ to see any showing before 6pm, $8.50 after. I only paid $11 to see Star Trek in IMAX. Ticket prices do vary considerably depending on your geographical location.
@94 I only paid $6 for my 7PM May 7th Opening Showing on Opening Night ticket.
94:
In Indiana, I get a matinee ticket for $5.50 and an after 6PM ticket for $5.50, $6.50 for non-seniors, so the heartland is a great place to see a movie several times. As a general rule, the studio gets 55% of average ticket price, so including overseas, it’s on the edge of making a profit before factoring in advertising; that’s rare these days. Most studios count on the DVDs and other home sales to make the film profitable.
I saw Terminator and Night @ Museum last weekend with the boys and the Mrs.and I’m predicting Trek will outgross both of those this weekend. Terminator has already used up any of its potentially interesting storylines and Night is a one-trick pony.
On the other hand, Trek has told over 700 stories, many of those very very well. It’s the Energizer Bunny of Franchises.
94,
Intersting that when adjusted for inflation, the four highest grossing Trek movies deal with the TOS crew. They really did put a whipping on the TNG movies, only FC really competes.
#98 – Hello fellow Hoosier!
#92 – Victor Hugo,
“For 40 years, “Star Trek’ was aired here dubbed in portuguese without interruption, altogether with “Bewitched” and “Batman and Robin”.”
I remember it was aired during the 70’s almost without interruption, but not so much after 1979. We got TOS on open TV again from 82~83, then in 85, then in the early 90s, but that was it. And cable TV was never a reality for most Brazilians, so I believe that explains why ST isn’t that popular anymore in Brazil. I remember that when TMP came out in Brazil in 1980 it was huge. The TV series was in its heyday and we could see the ads all the time on TV, and there was a lot of promotion. The movie stayed in theaters for months and months. After that no other ST movie got any promotion at all, no TV spots, nothing. One wouldn’t know that a new ST was playing in the theaters unless he/she was a fan. And with each sequel ST would stay less and less time in theaters.
Since I now live in the US, I wasn’t aware that changing the movie name back to the original was having such a negative impact. Interesting… BTW, are they promoting the movie at all, like TV spots, billboards, etc?
#94—-”In order for $7.18 to be an average when there are theaters charging over $14, many would have to charging less than $6. Since I know that’s not happening, I seriously question the validity of the number of tickets actually purchased as calculated by this method.”
My guess is that matinee pricing is figured in as well. I know many people who will not even go and see a movie *unless* it is a reduced-price matinee.
Also, the average price of a child’s ticket (and those of “seniors”, military personnel, etc.) are going to be lower than standard adult prices.
Our local theaters sell adult (non-matinee) tickets for $9.50 and child/senior (non-matinee) tickets for $7.50. Matinee pricing is $7.50 and $5.50 respectively for those tickets.
I paid $14.50 for IMAX.
There are also less conventional theaters like the local Alamo Drafthouse, where ticket prices are $.50 lower all the time, making regular tickets $9.00 and matinee tickets $7.00.
I would imagine that small town theaters all over the country might offer lower ticket prices than in a city of over 4 million people (Greater Houston), so those averages aren’t quite so unbeliveable to me—particularly when matinee and other discount pricing is taken into account to calculate an average.
Victor Hugo: The same is true of Israel. All this time, Star Trek was “Masa Bein HaKochavim” (”Journeys Between the Stars”), but the new movie was released as “Star Trek,” the English words spelled out in Hebrew.
But I think most Israelis knew it as Star Trek already.
100
Howdy back from Boone County
102
I derived the 7.18 figure from Box Office Mojo:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/about/adjuster.htm
I also derived the average yearly ticket prices from there along with unadjusted grosses.
Kids’ tickets are cheaper in a lot of places too.
In the midwest, most of a theaters profits derive from the concessions. $7.00 for a large popcorn? $5.00 for a Coke? Eeeyowwww!
Whoops, “Journey,” not “Journeys.” A better translation would be “Journey Among the Stars,” or even better, “Star Trek.” :-)
#104 – well now I know it’s truly time to move back to “God’s country”. I am really getting gouged on the West coast, not only do I pay more for a movie ticket, I pay the same for popcorn and a Coke. I saw that $7.18 number on BOM, but didn’t believe it either … until now.
#99 – some folks don’t care for the historical comparison. But if the numbers can be adequately compared by tickets sold, then TNG definitely suffered at the hands of TOS. But that isn’t really surprising either. A lot of TOS fans didn’t buy into TNG, so it makes sense the Trek fans would fracture along those lines. TOS did so well up until ST:IV because that was the only Trek there was. If TMP had been as exciting a film as ST09, I’m sure STII would have done much better at the box office, in much the same way I expect the current Trek sequel to outperform it.
#98, 104: and St. Joseph County (South Bend, IN) here… TREK is alive and well in Hoosierland.
Seen it three time, once in IMAX ($15.00). Doing my bit to keep the show alive… may see it one more time before waiting for the DVD. Christmas 2009?
I do hope the money keeps rolling in. Im hoping to go a 3rd time soom. Id love this lovie to gross $300 million worlwide.
Greg
UK
#106
This is why I buy one of those souvenir cups every year – refills are a $1 as opposed to $4.50 a pop.
If it finishes around $250 Domestic should finish 3rd for the summer behind Transformers:Revenge Of The Fallen and Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. Only other movie that might top it as far as I can see may be Up. If you had told me it would finish 3rd for the summer before the summer movie season started I would have said you were crazy. Too bad the foreign box office numbers have been less than stellar. Can’t wait for 2011 and the sequel.
#94-
Here in Ohio, full price is $8.50 and matinee is $4.25. Similar prices for popcorn and a drink as #104. The theaters are actually making more money on the refreshments than the ticket price! 80% of the ticket price vs. 95% of the refreshment price.
10.
I have seen it four times. Thanks for asking! : D
#110. You can’t write off UP, though nothing about it sounds like a film I want to see, despite the fact I have never seen a Pixar film I didn’t like a lot. Wall-e didn’t sound interesting to me either. Then there’s GI-Joe. I didn’t know anything about this film until I saw a trailer for it at Trek. Parmount has invested $170 Million into this and Hasbro is likely going to be marketing their asses off too. Considering the budget, I’m guessing Paramount expects it to do better than Trek. If Transformers’ gigantic grosses is a sign of anything, GI-Joe may be a surprising entry, but I think a real gamble to get into that franchise, unlike Trek which is a proven earner. Baring any major upsets, Trek should still clear top 5 for the year.
#113 I predict Trek will finish #3 for the summer. Up has a chance but Wall-E last summer didn’t top $250, that and the fact Night At The Museum will take a bite out of it’s box office and Land Of The Lost a week later. Don’t get me started on G.I. Joe the trailer looked bad, that plus the groans when everybody realized it was G.I. Joe don’t persuade me to think it will even come close. LONG LIVE TREK!!!
If you think about it, neither Transformers 2 nor the new Harry Potter are guarantied to best ST 2009. Transformers made $319M in 2007. Supposing the new movie is bad (and in those days bad word of mouth spread fast) and box office drops 25% (which isn’t that impossible, Wolverine will probably make 25% less than X-Men 3). A drop of 25% would result in $240M, probably behind ST 2009. I don’t think that is going to happen, but it isn’t impossible. Same for Harry Potter. The book series is over, the original fans are in their 20s by now. Supposing the new the movie drops 20% from the last entry, that would result in $233M, probably less than ST 2009. So nothing is set in stone yet.
And then we have Avatar in the end of the year, which would be a big hit or a big flop. We never know… Just a couple of months ago nobody could imagine ST 2009 making more money than Terminator Salvation, or even Wolverine.
Worldwide, I think Terminator Salvation will end up ahead of Trek, but who cares. Trek has clearly made enough money to ensure more sequels. The Brady Bunch Movie could have only hoped to have done as well.
101. opcode –
In some teathers here in Sao Paulo we could see a few bigger banners, but nothing like we saw when Indiana Jones IV opened (cardboard crates with the name Indiana Jones on it) or Watchmen (big cardboard panels featuring the characters). It was just written “Star Trek”, beautiful, but a little too subtle and minimalistic for the average Joe I guess.
What was outrageous by Paramount Brasil, in 2003, when ST: Nemesis was launched here in Brazil, they removed the name “Star Trek” from the titles, in the hope teenagers would walk in thinking it was about “RESIDENT EVIL: NEMESIS”. ehe, tell me about lack of confidence!
103: Nate -
“Masa Bein HaKochavim” (”Journeys Between the Stars”) is a beautiful name indeed. Well, it could be used as a subtitle. One of the advantages of living in a country with english as a second language.
We brazilians are used to having things dubbed and named in portuguese when aired on TV, we were told our voice actors are quite talented in the adaptations, so this recent standardization of names in english for merchandising purposes, as opposed to the named which was usually aired in TV during the 80´s and 90´s might cause a name dissociation.
#74 and 81, I realize there was lots of fighting in Star Trek. I also never, ever, ever sat down in front of Star Trek to watch the fights. They happened, but it wasn’t why I came. There may have been fights in every episode (no doubt due to the pressure of the same studio execs that thought Uhura and Kirk kissing would destroy TV forever) but that was never a reason I liked the show, nor was it an attractive point of the series. The fights, after all, were lame and slow and sloppy. I liked that they were fighting ABOUT something and that there were ideas.
If you people really are watching Trek just to see fights, try the old WWF instead. It’ll be more your style.
If it finishes around $250 Domestic should finish 3rd for the summer behind Transformers:Revenge Of The Fallen and Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. Only other movie that might top it as far as I can see may be Up. If you had told me it would finish 3rd for the summer before the summer movie season started I would have said you were crazy. Too bad the foreign box office numbers have been less than stellar. Can’t wait for 2011 and the sequel.
#95 in particular “Cagmar is back!”
I have said as many positive things as I have said negative throughout the process of this movie. And in the end, I think I made it pretty clear I enjoyed the movie thoroughly.
I also like to be honest and thoughtful about my opinions, however. Sorry not every thought that passes through my head delights the masses. Some might, but nobody mentions those, do they? So thanks.
All this talk of money, I thought Paramount were just making this movie for the fun of it!
He didn’t bring Shatner back but Abram’s, Orci and Kurtzman still did something huge in the trek world and that was bring Captain James T Kirk back.
As filthy as was Kirk’s demise was in generations Abrams has done the polar opposite in bringing Kirk back in grand style.
Although i thought Stewart’s Picard was a very good character there will never be a hankering for Picard’s return from the fans. Not in significant enough number anyway.
Kirk is back, i know it was a hugely smart marketing decision but thank you guys.
106
Man you are so right. TNG really was where the fans split. For me, I was dead smack in the center of the split. I enjoyed TNG, but not as much as TOS. I hate to admitt it, but I dont think I ever gave TNG a fair shake. I loved TOS (and the movies) so much I couldnt help but feel like they were replacing the characters I love (as they eventually did).
TNG was a VERY good show, but they made, for the most part, pretty bad movies. Again you are right on the money with what you said… us Trek fans either quit during or after TNG (like me) or kept on to DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise.
#123 Don Farnsworth wrote:
While there is no argument Kirk got the worst death scene ever in Gnerations and deserves much better, I’m not so sure Kirk was brought back in “grand style” here.
So far, Kirk lost the girl (to Spock!), the only girl we saw Kirk get was the one any guy in Starfleet could get, he lost every fight he was in and spent most of the movie running away, crawling around and nursing his wounds, or getting hauled away by security. This made his appointment to Captain all the more hollow at the end. Spock came off the hero here, not Kirk. If anything, I would say Spock was brought back in grand style. Perhaps the next film Kirk will get the heroic spotlight, but for now, Kirk’s reintroduction was on the same end of the spectrum as his ignominious death.
Showbizdata.com is reporting the following.
Star Trek
PARAMOUNT
Thtrs: 4053 / Gross: $2.05M
Total: $195.10M
200 million before the weekend hits? I think so!
94. RD: I noted you adjusted the overall movie grosses for inflation. However, did you adjust the production numbers for inflation? If not, then the profit margins are inaccurate. Just a thought.
#126 – Duncan MacLeod,
Not if it keeps slipping against Angels and Demons which beat it yesterday as #3. Terminator’s back on top too. Up will be a serious challenge if for no other reason than the 3D gimmick. And BOM only shows $193M as the current total gross.
1. Terminator Salvation $3,688,038
2. Night at the Museum II $3,608,731
3. Angels & Demons $2,173,188
4. Star Trek $2,012,878
#127 – Michael, yes the production budget numbers are also adjusted for inflation. It would be pretty useless otherwise.TMP only cost $45M in 1979 dollars. At the time, it was the most expensive movie ever made! Imagine that, a Star Trek film was the most expensive movie ever made at the time! That’s how valuable the franchise was and is to Paramount.
#125 What movie did you watch?
“So far, Kirk lost the girl (to Spock!)”
I didn’t particularly want to see Uhura romancing either one, but even in TOS, the women were occasionally drawn to Spock or even Bones rather than Kirk. Something tells me young Kirk was not hurting for admirers of his own.
“the only girl we saw Kirk get was the one any guy in Starfleet could get”
Anyone could get that? Next, please!!
“he lost every fight he was in”
You mean when he was fighting 4 guys at once and, later, superiorly strong Romulans? What a wimp! By the way, he still managed to kill one of those Romulans.
“and spent most of the movie running away”
Except for that part when he space jumped onto the platform and disabled it. And then jumped after Sulu and saved him. Oh, and then took command of the Enterprise so he could chase after Nero in order to save Earth and rescue Pike and defeat the bad guys, all of which he accomplished.
The foreign gross has (finally) been updated on BOM to $91m, putting the total revenue at $284m, and the split back to 68%/32%. Not sure if Japan has it yet.
129. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote:
I saw the same movie you did. And I’m talking about what was being said and done on screen.
1) whether your gut tells you Kirk was doing just fine, we NEVER saw it.
2) Uhura specifically alluded to the fact that this green girl was a nymphomaniac who routinely brought back horny dumb guys to their room constantly. Yes anybody could get that.
3) You did not satisfy the argument that, while he sometimes held his own, he ultimately got his ass kicked every time. The original Kirk would have won at least one of those fights without help.
4) He was picked to jump on the platform. He only saved Sulu after Sulu saved him. And frankly, they should not have survived. Would Kirk have jumped after Sulu if he had not had a shoot, which he did not know would malfunction? Who knows. But it would have been suicide if he did. Taking command of the Enterprise was a huge gamble (but that’s not Kirk’s fault, it was a poor storyline). Also only he and Spock beaming onboard by themselves was another huge gamble. And an idiot move. They should have both been killed and if either had, Earth would have been destroyed. But I will give you this one, since he only technically ran away from the monsters. However, everything else he made up as he went along and got lucky. To say he was then promoted to Captain for being reckless and lucky is even more insulting. The Kirk I remember thought things through before he leaped. But my point remains, we never got to see Kirk be the guy I remember from TOS. Here’s hoping this changes.
#131 RD……
“whether your gut tells you Kirk was doing just fine, we NEVER saw it.”
I saw it. I saw it when he lead the way and showed Sulu how to disable the drilling platform. I saw it when he prevented the Enterprise from coming under sneak attack at Vulcan. I saw it when he out-shot numerous Romulans aboard the Narada. And I especially saw it when he and he alone made the decision to pursue Nero, a decision that resulted in everyone on Earth surviving. You didn’t see it because you didn’t want to.
“Uhura specifically alluded to the fact that this green girl was a nymphomaniac who routinely brought back horny dumb guys to their room constantly. Yes anybody could get that.”
Alluded? You’re just making stuff up. Who said Gaila was a nymphomaniac? Not Uhura. Where I come from, hot single chicks always get the most suitors. It doesn’t mean they select them all. Kirk got her because he had the goods. By the way, that place I come from is called Earth (Texas, specifically).
“You did not satisfy the argument that, while he sometimes held his own, he ultimately got his ass kicked every time.”
In the first fight, he “held his own” pretty well for fighting 4 men AND being wasted! I don’t think we ever saw Kirk Prime have to fight while drunk. In the fight with Nero & Ayel, he was overpowered, but still used his cunning to kill Ayel. The fight against Kruge in ST III wasn’t really all that different. Kruge had the total upperhand, until the ground beneath him gave way.
“Would Kirk have jumped after Sulu if he had not had a shoot, which he did not know would malfunction? Who knows. But it would have been suicide if he did.”
Don’t see your point there at all. He did have a chute. Last he knew, it was functional. So he did the heroic thing to save his shipmate.
“Taking command of the Enterprise was a huge gamble (but that’s not Kirk’s fault, it was a poor storyline).”
Right, because we never saw Mr. “Risk is our business” Kirk take huge gambles before?! Please.
“Also only he and Spock beaming onboard by themselves was another huge gamble. And an idiot move.”
Not if they wanted to move about the ship undetected, which was their intent. In that case, it made sense for as few as possible to beam aboard. And I seem to remember numerous episodes of TOS where Kirk beamed into a dangerous situation alone or with just Spock, including “The Enterprise Incident,” when he beamed aboard the Romulan ship alone. In that instance, too, the intent was to sneak around.
“we never got to see Kirk be the guy I remember from TOS. Here’s hoping this changes.”
This was a prequel. How many interviews do JJ and the actors have to give about ‘the journey towards becoming the classic characters?’ This Kirk was 25, not 34. And the final scene indicated that “the Kirk you remember” is indeed headed our way.
As I said, you only saw what you wanted to see.
132. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote:
I love how you take my quote out of context: “whether your gut tells you Kirk was doing just fine, we NEVER saw it.”
If you read your own post, you’ll know I was responding to Kirk’s dating prowess, not his selflessness.
You know what I really love about this site. Anybody who disagrees with those who loved the film, gets branded as someone who went in wanting to hate it.
“You didn’t see it because you didn’t want to.”
Please.
“Alluded? You’re just making stuff up…. Kirk got her because he had the goods.
First, I am not. The green chick specifically said Urhura was mad at her for bringing guys back to the room to have sex with them. Even Kirk is taken aback and asks “how many guys have you …”. Are there that many guys who have the “goods” Kirk does? If so, he’s not so special. Also, Orci has already explained that there was supposed to be a scene that explains Kirk was using her to get the test changed. Her role in the movie was as a bimbo. Besides the definition of an Orion girl is oversexed.
“In the fight with Nero & Ayel, he was overpowered, but still used his cunning to kill Ayel.”
It was hardly his cunning, but Ayel’s stupidity. Though technically a win, I would have liked to see Kirk “actually” win.
“So he did the heroic thing to save his shipmate.” Yes he did, and I would have done it too. But nobody would make me captain for it. It was not heroic, there was no risk. I’ve done as much myself skydiving, though no one’s life was at risk. I did it for fun.
we never saw Mr. “Risk is our business” Kirk take huge gambles before?! Please. I only recall Kirk taking well thought out risks.
Not if they wanted to move about the ship undetected, which was their intent. The ship was two miles long. You could have beamed a platoon over there and been undetected.
And the final scene indicated that “the Kirk you remember” is indeed headed our way.As I said, you only saw what you wanted to see.
Funny how Spock was the way I remember him, except of course for the public make-out sessions with Uhura. As much as you seem to think I saw things that were not there, I would suggest you saw what you wanted to see as well. I sat back and let the film entertain me and thought about what the screen showed me afterward. And, I really don’t care for the explanation that this is a nascent Kirk who doesn’t yet know how to win a fight, or makes rash decisions without some thought. It is already a problem for many people (including non-Trekkers) that Kirk was promoted to Captain so quickly, it’s worse that he didn’t really exhibit at least some of those superior qualities on film.
You’ve promised that I will see a fully formed Kirk in the next film. I’m gonna hold you to it. LOL, hell I don’t even remember why I made the comment in the first place. It certainly wasn’t to start some geeky debate about how great Kirk was.
(reprise) Happy days are here again. We don’t need the Shat to make Trek big again. Happy days are here again!!
So what RD needed in order to be satisfied was seeing Kirk have sex with a woman who wasn’t green, because green chicks are easy. Got it. You got it, Bob Orci? Write that on a post it note for next time…
31. You’re still ignoring film rental.
STAR TREK HAS NOT RECOUPED ITS NEGATIVE COSTS, even ignoring P&A.
#136. According to Anthony Pascale, Trek has been in the black for some time now.